Dear Mohammed,
Peace be upon you,
May I share some thoughts about your issues of concern which you could consider looking into. This is notwithstanding that brothers Duster and Hamzeh have continuously offered to respond to your contentions. Hopefully this is acceptable with brother Joseph. I hope he will respond to your contentions to his article where necessary.
You share:
“
but I think this is only applicable for that time i.e. for marriages that are fixed(given the bridal due) before the revelation of Qur'an.
here's the translation of 5:5 as I understand the verse,
"This day (all) the good things are made lawful for you; and the food of those who have been given the Book is lawful for you and your food is lawful for them; and the chaste women from among the believers and the chaste women from among those who have been given the Book before you; when you have given them their bridal due, marrying not fornicating nor taking them for secret concubines; and whoever denies faith, his work indeed is of no account, and in the hereafter he shall be one of the losers" ”
In my view, I do admit that ‘
ataytumu’ - ‘you have given’ (5:5) truly alludes to a perfect action yes especially as emphasized by the 2nd person plural perfect verb ‘
atay’ - ‘have given.’ However, one should also not overlook the timely provision which the adverb ‘when’ - ‘i
dha’ comes with. It certainly would have been referring to a ‘future’ event (the payment of a bridal due) especially when we consider that there are other ‘provisions’ that were being made lawful as mentioned prior to that in that same verse. It could be argued, from that verse alone, that a possibility is even hinted as to the absence of such a bridal due (
ujura) arrangement in the manner the Qur’an would have expected it, prior to such a general permission (
halal) to the believers.
On the other hand, if one is to understand that the provision of marrying from the chaste women (
muhswanat) of the People of the Book to the believers only applied to those already given their bridal due, in that case then, what entails the new permission, what entails the new marriage arrangement that is being alluded to and in which sense is it a new arrangement? With the same line of thought, one is also bound to define/ identify the category of People of the Book whose ‘food’ (
thwa’amu) is permitted to the believers for consumption. What prior allegiances or contracts would have to have bound the believers with such a category for them to enjoy each other’s foods in the same manner as with those already given a bridal due for the issue of marriage?
You share:
“
So as they believed in the Qur'an, they will have Swalat, Fasting, Hajj etc. right? i.e. they are no more Nazarenes/Christians.”
Not necessarily. Believing in the Qur’an does not outright tantamount to rejecting other scriptures, ceasing to be followers of older scriptures nor not being the People of the Book, Jews nor Christians. If one does so, it would simply be a matter of choice, not a 'must do' thing as you seem to insist. Even before they believe in the Qur’an, they still are bound to perform such religious practices as
swalaat, fasting,
Hajj, etc. Just not the way you seem to be expecting them to perform them, that is, the way followers of Qur’an and believers under Quran’s guidance are supposed to, to every detail.
As brother Duster has tried to show you the context of the implication of such ‘isolated’ verses as 5:51, further referring you to brother Joseph’s article on the same
[1], brother Hamzeh has also nicely tried to rightly broaden the scope of the ‘descriptive’ term ‘
Islam’ (not a ‘linguistic’ label/ tag) which actually brings us under one ‘roof’ (
Islam) and in fact ‘describes’ us (Qur’an followers and followers of older scriptures) altogether (
muslimeen).
In as much as the contextually timely bound verses 5:82-84 are used to infer that those Christians that would likely be closer to Qur’an believers are those who would proclaim to have believed in the Qur’an or would shed tears when its strongly captivating verses are read, it has to be maintained that upon such an admission, they are said to be admitting to surely have already been muslims prior (28:53) and even so, amongst the believers/ followers of the Qur’an and themselves, each people has been prescribed their own law (
shir’atan) and method (
minhajan) to be tested in them so each is supposed to race in good works (arguably as per their own law and method) for it is to God where all shall finally return for reckoning (5:48).
Therefore, while verses 24:32 and 4:25 might contextually have possibly been with reference to women amongst believers/ followers of the Qur’an, verse 2:221 broadens the scope of the permissible category as those chosen with a ‘primary’ determination of correct and pure belief while verse 5:5 specifically permits those from among the People of the Book arguably with a ‘primary’ signification of the ‘correct’ belief in ‘one’ God as in 2:221. Thus, in light of 42:13 and 5:48, verses 3:19, 3:85 and 48:28 would not be referring to those believing souls amongst the People of the Book who still maintain their stance towards following their scriptures even after accepting the veracity of the message of the Qur’an alongside its divine origin claim.
You ask:
“
Now think, is the term 'people of the book' applicable to today's Jews/Christians?(who do not follow the Qur'an)”
If by ‘do not follow the Qur’an’ you mean not adhering to the ‘law’ (
shir’at) and ‘method’ (
minhaj) prescribed by the Qur’an for believers then
yes, as long as those particular Jews/ Christians do adopt the ‘law’ (
shir’at) and ‘method’ (
minhaj) proffered by their scriptures as it ought to be adopted - with the Qur’an as a check/ criterion (
muhaymin, 5:48) and as the overall criterial authority (
furqan, 25:1).
You then append:
“
[and do you think that all people today who say 'we follow the Qur'an' are in true dheen?]”
Certainly not all. You can refer to brother Hamzeh’s response above. See also verse 3:167 where God sees to the condition of hypocrites who conceal what is in their hearts to proclaim false confessions. In my humble opinion, verses 3:113-115 do not only apply to the People of the Book but generally to any group of believing souls including believers/ followers of the Qur’an.
Finally you share:
“
So before following others and their works verify for yourself, for your safety.”
I would in this case again share to you brother Hamzeh’s advice to you above regarding this. As brother Duster has shared above, it is in the first place at best contradictory and at worst, dishonest, to jot down statements whose undertones appear to insinuate blind-following of others, while again indirectly giving an implication to be followed of ones own thoughts, obviously, blindly. The strength of an argument/ thought/ idea used/ referred to is what makes it to either be accepted or rejected hence dismissed/ denounced or referred to/ be used. Therefore, presenting or referring one to somebody else’s exposition, discourse or thoughts does not mean that one is blindly ‘f
ollowing others and have not verified the information, for their own safety’ (sharing brother Hamzeh’s advice to you is a good example of that by the way). Again, if in future I happen in another thread to refer to a given argument that you brother Mohammed raise in this thread today which I find convincing and evidenced from the Qur’an, surely, as you may agree, I should then not be criticized of not using my intellect, my ‘reasoning’ ability, not verifying the information for myself nor will I be ‘following’ your arguments blindly. Kindly think about this.
I hope that my comments shall be received with the respect with which it is imparted.
Regards,
Athman.
REFERENCE:
[1]. Taking unbelievers as friends to avoid harmhttp://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=260